My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06/11/2014 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2010's
>
2014
>
06/11/2014 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/4/2018 6:26:43 PM
Creation date
12/14/2016 1:19:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
302
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• Be supported by a study demonstrating that the fees are proportionate in amount to <br />the need created by new development paying the fee; and <br />• Be spent in a manner that directs a proportionate benefit to new development, <br />typically accomplished through a list of capacity -adding projects included in the <br />County's Capital Improvement Plan, Capital Improvement Element, or another <br />planning document/Master Plan. <br />In addition, one of the requirements of the 2006 Florida Impact Fee Act is that the studies <br />be based on most recent and localized data. <br />This technical report has been prepared to support legal compliance with existing case law <br />and statutory requirements. The methodology used in this report is consistent with that <br />used in the 2004 and 2005 technical reports, which are the basis of the current adopted <br />fees. Although the Florida courts have yet to expressly address the methodology <br />underpinning the Affordable Growth Strategy, this aspect of the report is based on the long- <br />standing legal standards described in this report. The technical report also documents the <br />methodology components for each of the impact fee areas, including an evaluation of the <br />inventory, service area, level -of -service (LOS), cost, credit, and demand components. <br />Information supporting this analysis was obtained from the County and other sources, as <br />indicated. <br />Three primary factors affected the County's impact fee levels: <br />• Since 2005, the County built additional infrastructure and increased the capital asset <br />inventory significantly in most program areas. This results in an increased asset <br />value, which in turn, increases the impact fee. <br />• In most infrastructure areas, the County used or is projected to use other revenue <br />sources to supplement impact fees, such as optional sales tax revenues, ad valorem <br />tax revenues, and other revenues. Depending on the program area and the level of <br />on-going investment, these contributions result in an increase in the credit <br />component for some program areas, which in turn reduces the impact fee. In <br />others, if the investment was made in earlier years and are not projected to <br />continue at the same levels, the credit may decrease compared to the previous <br />study, which in turn increases the impact fee. <br />Tindale -Oliver & Associates, Inc. Indian River County <br />June 2014 <br />ES -2 Impact Fee Update Study <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.